What is meant by "evolutionary history" of a disease?

What is meant by "evolutionary history" of a disease? Topic: Define a research paper
May 23, 2019 / By Ghislaine
Question: Hello, I'm doing a research paper and I'm having trouble defining what something like evolutionary history of bubonic plague means. What can I do to start it? I don't know that yersinia pestis evolved at all. Thanks.
Best Answer

Best Answers: What is meant by "evolutionary history" of a disease?

Dena Dena | 10 days ago
Evolution history is the slow, yet progressive change that occurs morphologically within taxa over time,
👍 108 | 👎 10
Did you like the answer? What is meant by "evolutionary history" of a disease? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Define a research paper

Dena Originally Answered: If the road ahead meant much suffering because of disease, would you opt for an easier death?
VERY GOOD QUESTION ! Nice to see you back Dave. I may be too open and honest here, but I would favor suicide if I had no chance of recovery. A bullet through the head is messy but it works. If I could get enough morphine, an overdose would be a better way to go. I have had patients who did just that. They felt they were a burden to the family. They knew (from me) that they had no chance of getting better. They simply took the pain meds I prescribed for them and overdosed themselves. I was not in collusion with them. That is unethical in the USA. I never discussed that option with any patient. But I was not surprised when it happened. I agree with DeniseDDS 100%. She and I have talked about this by phone. I have seen natural deaths hundreds of times. Dying looks hard. Being dead looks easy. We will all die some day. I agree the easier exit the better, but there is no physician assisted suicide in North Carolina - and I'm not sure I would have the nerve to do that anyway. It is such a personal decision. No one can stop people from deciding this on their own. - - - - Funny story about that Dave. My daughter and one of my lady friends thought I was suicidal two years ago. I was not. Neither one of them know me very well. So they took all the ammunition I had scattered all over my house for my 19 guns. I don't hunt animals, I just like target practice. They threw away hundreds of dollars worth of ammo. But they didn't find three bullets - .357 magnum - in my desk. As I told them, I would only have needed one bullet. You usually don't get a second shot. Kinda sad when your own daughter doesn't know you at all. I would have to have a very good reason to end this veil of tears / shuffle off this mortal coil - if you read Shakespeare. Hamlet - Act III Scene I - - - I think, if memory serves. I don't need to look it up. - - - - For bron357 - my dad had one leg taken off for peripheral vascular/diabetic disease. They were ready to take off the other leg. My dad's mind was gone so he could not help me. It was 8 months after a stroke that never improved My mother gave me medical power of attorney, so it was my decision. I stopped his antibiotics - or rather I asked his doctors to let me call the shots. Doctors should not take care of their own family members. Dad died of infected bed sores on his feet and sacral area. I stayed with him until the end. He was out of it with a Fentanyl patch. It was still a bad way to go. My dad was my best friend. If he could have talked he would have asked me to overdose him in some manner. I did the best I could with the prevailing rules.
Dena Originally Answered: If the road ahead meant much suffering because of disease, would you opt for an easier death?
Absolutely. There are fates worse than death. In an ICU with tubes coming out of every orifice in my body, feeding tubes, IVs, meds, meds, and more meds, in constant pain, poked and prodded by residents and medical students? That is not a life worth living to me. I spent five weeks working in an ICU and there was a patient that had been there for about four months. He had had multiple surgeries to his small bowel, so much scarring the surgeons couldn't tell what was scar tissue and what was bowel, he was being fed through a tube and intravenously, he was on more medications than I can count, full of holes, leaking tube feeding formula...needless to say he died about a month after I left. He was miserable every single day of his stay, which cost the medical system likely upward of 5-7 million dollars. All for what? I also worked in a nursing home for 4 months and I will say that what I saw reinforced my belief that I do not want a slow, lingering decline. At the point where quality of life deteriorates to where my dignity is compromised I would opt for assisted suicide if permitted. There is a good reason why so many healthcare professionals opt for palliative care/hospice instead of seeking the most aggressive treatment to the very end. Six good months with a week or two of slow decline is better than one year, five years, or even ten spent in absolute misery with no let up.
Dena Originally Answered: If the road ahead meant much suffering because of disease, would you opt for an easier death?
I would certainly refuse treatment other than palliative care. I would hope that euthanasia was legalised by then. Suicide would be something I would consider, but only if I was sure it wouldn't hurt my family, particularly my daughter, even more. I believe it should always be a patient's right to refuse treatment and that euthanasia should be legalised in the case of terminal illness. It seems bizarre that we can be proscuted for letting our pets suffer and prosecuted by releasing those we love from the same suffering. Add: when my own mother was dying of cancer she stopped breathing every time she fell asleep and would wake up minutes later gasping for breath. We were nursing her at home and the third evening of this we told the Dr she wasn't sleeping. she was unable to swallow so we asked the Dr to give her something so she could "get a good night's sleep". It was sad but peaceful that she never woke again.

Calanthia Calanthia
Evolutionary history generally means the relatedness of a species to other species (cladogram) with perhaps other information such as when a trait evolved. This can be noted both in time of the event and in relation to other "branches" of decent such as chimp's ancestors lost their tails about 30 million years ago after they split off from monkeys but before they split from humans thus both lines of decent (chimps and humans) share the trait of a lack of tail due to our recent common ancestry. All species evolve and bacteria especially so. That's why bacteria can become antibiotic resistant. I would start on just reading about yersinia pestis, see if you can find a cladogram or phylogeny or it's evolutionary line. Also, any time it has become more or less virulent, this is a change in traits, if this is a heritable trait (virulence generally is) then that population of bacteria has evolved. Also, if the bacteria is somehow able to live in new hosts this is another (usually heritable) trait and thus evolution. Hope that helps.
👍 30 | 👎 1

Calanthia Originally Answered: The concept of endosymbiosis is of great significance to the evolutionary history of life. Why is this thecase?
It has been hypothesized that cells today have mitochondria and/or chloroplasts because of the endosymbiosis of a primitive cell by another primitive cell from eons ago. This is further evidenced by the fact that these two organelles contain their own DNA (and thus RNA) and are entirely capable of generating their own power supply, if you will. As we know now, mitochondria and chloroplasts are the primary organelles that generate ATP, the main energy source for virtually all cellular activity. Without endosymbiosis, and therefore no mitochondria and/or chloroplasts in modern-day cells, cells won't be able to move, differentiate, grow and divide, send signals to other cells, and so on.
Calanthia Originally Answered: The concept of endosymbiosis is of great significance to the evolutionary history of life. Why is this thecase?
Although I would vigorously disagree with your prof about the implications of endosymbiosis as there is zero proof whatsoever that the relationship of these "organisms" has ever been different than what it is today and the entire theory of evolution FAILS every single scientific test put to it, without a single exception for hundreds of years now. The answer is implicit in the description of what this is. Wikipedia has a good explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiont The assumption is that there was a time when the organisms were seperate and that they evolved in such a way as to no longer be individual organisms. Supposedly, this is a method by which simpler organisms "evolve" into more complex ones. The problem is, of course, like with all evolution, a lack of any evidence, whatsoever, of intermediate forms.....not in the fossil record, not anywhere. Endosymbiosis exists but as an evolutionary concept it assumes that there was a time in the past that, for the organisms involved, it did not exist. There is NO evidence to support that whatsoever. Instead, it is simply assumed that evolution is true and that it must have happened that way. That is a reliance of faith....not science.

If you have your own answer to the question define a research paper, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.